Origins of the American Civil War

The two shares had different philosophies of governance. Originally, the coastal region wanted little government interference, while the good deal of the interior wanted government protection. These philosophies shifted with metre until the to the south was the region opposing government interference and the North was more unstrained to seek government control and protection.

Economic issues were a arising of dissension between the two regions, especially in equipment casualty of the exercise of constitutional power by the central government in economic way outs. The conflict between North and reciprocal ohm over ideology was framed in terms of nationalism versus sectionalism, and the southbound was a sectionalism region that wanted to have got its own rules and government. The nullification controversy highlighted this issue as second Carolina in 1832 declared the tariff laws null and void:

This teaching asserted that a state could refuse to allow laws it deemed unconstitutional to be executed within its borders.

Northern manufacturers and growers saw the southbound as having an unfair value, and the South jealously guarded that advantage against any abolitionist talk. Compromises were worked out by which thralldom was disallow in new territories, but it was still allowed in the southerly states where it had become an entrenche

An interesting survey on the issue can be found in an analysis of war by Blainey, who discusses the causes of war in general, coating more than 100 wars extending from 1700 to 1971. He confines himself to outside(a) wars and avoids elegant wars except where they might have an impact on an international conflict, but interestingly, he includes the American Civil war because he sees it as a war between two sovereign states and therefore an international war. The North and the South can so be perceived as different sovereign entities as yet before the war began.

Indeed, events just prior to 1860 did suggest that the South was beginning to think of itself as a separate entity and that ties to the heart and soul were coming undone:

Some historians have treated this matter in their writings in a generalized or cursory fashion, while others have made the question the rivet of their work and have tried to delve more deeply into the question of how and why the Civil War started. Among the more general works, that of Timothy Levi Biel examines a number of the forces operating at the time and indicates that the war was set into motion over time done the effects of westward expansion, new states and the battle over slavery in them, questions of education, slavery, and the economic system supported by and in a way dependent on slavery. Biel finds that the war was brought to the highest degree by what he calls "unmendable divisions" between North and South. He besides finds that the election of Lincoln led directly to the war since the South did not trust Lincoln and believed that he stood for the total abolition of slavery, bringing about the economic ruin of the South:

d and seemingly necessary part of the economy. The view developed that the Republicans were a northern party. The Democratic party at the time was go against into sectional halves over certain issue and actions, such as the Dred Scott decision in 1857, the constitutional crisis in Kansas in 1857, the Lincoln-Dougla
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.